You can't have a decent society without taxes and taxation ultimately relies on force.

Do you think American society is a decent society?

"Decent" is a relative term. The US is not as decent a place to live as the UK or most Northern European countries. I would still be perfectly happy living in pretty well any US state and would much prefer that to living in, say, India or China.

But I understand that tyranny exists because people accept it in exchange for goodies.

That is obviously illogical for a whole bunch of reasons. To start with, it's not really a tyranny if people actually wants the "goodies" as you put it. Second, if a society of a hundred people works well for everyone except one who keeps rambling about "tyranny", shouldn't just this person be kindly asked to leave, instead of ninety-nine people acommodating for the crazy one?

Oh well, when you come back to planet Earth, where using force to maintain a stable society is needed, do let us know.

However you need to justify it. I know that it is wrong to initiate force. But I understand that tyranny exists because people accept it in exchange for goodies.

The correct way to look at it is that wealth and income are created by the state providing a safe legal and social environment. In countries like the US with well run systems, the wealth created is huge. The recipients of this largesse pay some of it in taxes. Take away the taxes and you take away the safe legal and social environment and US incomes fall to the levels of Somalia. Its perfectly moral to insist that those who are lucky enough to profit from living in a well run state make a contribution to the running costs of that state.

“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

You don't have to be moral or good. There is no requirement there. The only thing people need to do is follow that little pearl of wisdom so nicely stated by TJ there.

Thomas Jefferson had no problem with slavery or taxation. If you are happy to accept his authority, you are happy that taxation is moral as is the violence needed to back up tax demands.

TJ wasn't perfect, but he was on the right track there.

You nicely illustrate just how collectivists and statists always end up resorting to violence. They are basically incapable of not resorting to violence because they simply have no rational arguments otherwise. What better argument than just running around and beating and murdering people? Great argument! Got a problem? Kill it! Violence DOES solve invented and contrived problems!

“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

You don't have to be moral or good. There is no requirement there. The only thing people need to do is follow that little pearl of wisdom so nicely stated by TJ there.

Thomas Jefferson had no problem with slavery or taxation. If you are happy to accept his authority, you are happy that taxation is moral as is the violence needed to back up tax demands.

TJ wasn't perfect, but he was on the right track there.

You nicely illustrate just how collectivists and statists always end up resorting to violence. They are basically incapable of not resorting to violence because they simply have no rational arguments otherwise. What better argument than just running around and beating and murdering people? Great argument! Got a problem? Kill it! Violence DOES solve invented and contrived problems!

I agree. We are a violent species and no society can ever exist without violence. I see you would prefer we were not a violent species. That's very nice.

So someone who acknowledges that their taxes pay for roads, schools, the fire and police departments, hospitals, just to name several, and hence feels that freeloading by avoiding taxes is a dick move, is "brainwashed" or "stupid".

And as for the "you don't have to" argument because governments don't know what bitcoin is yet - it's a thing you got at price X, and you sold at price Y. So at a minimum, if you convert your profits (Y-X) to fiat you have some kind of tax bill. The other side - spending bitcoins bought (or mined) at X for something at Y (Y > X) - is something that governments will have to decide how to classify, but don't think that just because they haven't issued a ruling yet means your profits are free.

Try this on for size - if you don't pay you fair share of taxes then you are a freeloader, and I hope your house burns down, or you die in the street after being hit by a car, or some other fate that is deserving of someone who's willing to take the benefits of living in a society but isn't willing to contribute to the financial upkeep thereof.

If you don't want to pay taxes, move to a country that has no (or minimal) taxes. There are plenty around.

For starters, not wanting to be stolen from at the point of a gun is not at all the same thing as being uninterested in helping the poor or putting out fires ect... Dont get me wrong it could mean that, im sure there are plenty of people who subscribe to your argument and yet dont pay taxes anyway because they legitimately dont care about the poor or having fires put out, but it doesn't necessarily mean this. There are those who believe that these same services could be provided, probably at a higher quality and for a lower price, by voluntary interaction instead of state threats of violence. Now it may be the case that we are wrong about this, and if you provide me with good evidence i will accept it. But either way i feel it is important to understand that many tax avoiders are, at the very least, 100% legitimately well intentioned.

i mean come on do you really think that just because someone doesn't want to pay taxes that he doesn't want his house to be protected from fires. Isn't it POSSIBLE that he might also donate some of his money to the local volunteer fire department? do you really think there is not one tax avoider on earth who does this?

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?

So someone who acknowledges that their taxes pay for roads, schools, the fire and police departments, hospitals, just to name several, and hence feels that freeloading by avoiding taxes is a dick move, is "brainwashed" or "stupid".

And as for the "you don't have to" argument because governments don't know what bitcoin is yet - it's a thing you got at price X, and you sold at price Y. So at a minimum, if you convert your profits (Y-X) to fiat you have some kind of tax bill. The other side - spending bitcoins bought (or mined) at X for something at Y (Y > X) - is something that governments will have to decide how to classify, but don't think that just because they haven't issued a ruling yet means your profits are free.

Try this on for size - if you don't pay you fair share of taxes then you are a freeloader, and I hope your house burns down, or you die in the street after being hit by a car, or some other fate that is deserving of someone who's willing to take the benefits of living in a society but isn't willing to contribute to the financial upkeep thereof.

If you don't want to pay taxes, move to a country that has no (or minimal) taxes. There are plenty around.

For starters, not wanting to be stolen from at the point of a gun is not at all the same thing as being uninterested in helping the poor or putting out fires ect... Dont get me wrong it could mean that, im sure there are plenty of people who subscribe to your argument and yet dont pay taxes anyway because they legitimately dont care about the poor or having fires put out, but it doesn't necessarily mean this. There are those who believe that these same services could be provided, probably at a higher quality and for a lower price, by voluntary interaction instead of state threats of violence. Now it may be the case that we are wrong about this, and if you provide me with good evidence i will accept it. But either way i feel it is important to understand that many tax avoiders are, at the very least, 100% legitimately well intentioned.

i mean come on do you really think that just because someone doesn't want to pay taxes that he doesn't want his house to be protected from fires. Isn't it POSSIBLE that he might also donate some of his money to the local volunteer fire department? do you really think there is not one tax avoider on earth who does this?

Fair point. But does it matter? If you object to funding for police services you can pretend that your taxes only get spent on the fire department. But what you can't do is refuse to pay any taxes.